• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Aguilar comparison DB359, DB750, DB680 & TH500

#41
jasonbraatz said:
I know I'm the resident AG500 advocate but this is just the furthest thing from my experiences with it.
Click to expand...

I should have IMO'd my comment. Compared to the other heads I use and prefer, and even to the TH500, the low end is quite different. Of course, many love it, and it is typical 'high quality Aguilar'. The TH500 is, to my ear, a similar chewy tone, but better in articulation and it has a more 'musical' and 'tube-like' breakup when you dial in the grind versus the AG500 to my ear. It does not surprise me that they disontinued that model when the TH500 came out. IMO of course:)
 
#42
KJung said:
Just a word of warning. I've spent a lot of time with the DB359. It sounds very good at low levels (VERY good), and I guess if you like the way it breaks up and distorts at moderate volume levels, that is cool. But for relatively clean output, the TH500 will BURY the 359.
Click to expand...

Just purley based on volume - I too thought the volume of the DB359 was week when having the preamp gain at 12:00 or 1:00. It wasn't till you pushed the pre gain to 3:00 that the master volume became much more sensitive.

It got pretty darn loud honestly. Did you ever have the gain at 3:00 ?

(And FWIW it sounded pretty good when loading the pre that hard - nice fat midrange bump and compressed high's and lows).
 
#43
Modern Growl said:
Just purley based on volume - I too thought the volume of the DB359 was week when having the preamp gain at 12:00 or 1:00. It wasn't till you pushed the pre gain to 3:00 that the master volume became much more sensitive.

It got pretty darn loud honestly. Did you ever have the gain at 3:00 ?

(And FWIW it sounded pretty good when loading the pre that hard - nice fat midrange bump and compressed high's and lows).
Click to expand...

It dirtied up too much for me personally at those settings, but obviously if you like the grind and grit, like most tube amps, 200 watts will get loud as heck.

Edit: Of course, gain level impact depends a lot on the output of the instrument and player technique, so hard to talk about specific gain structure settings across players and instruments.
 
#44
Big +1 to the p-bass with flats into a 659. That's just killing it for me into any power amp from my mackie monitors to the db728. Telefunken 12ax7's on board here. I, too was underwhelmed with the 359. Until the 659, I ran a fodera 2000 pedal pre straight into the 728 and that packed some serious punch.

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but on the 359/659 the eq controls are flat at 0 as they are boost only.
 
#45
thiessen3.14 said:
...
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but on the 359/659 the eq controls are flat at 0 as they are boost only.
Click to expand...

This just made me open up the manual. It does state "boosts up to..." Now I'm curious if they are boost only, but it doesn't really matter. It sounds so good!

From the DB359 manual:
"Treble:
Tube driven shelving type, boosts up to 12 db. The center frequency is set at 4 kHz.
Bass:
Tube driven shelving type, boosts up to 12 db. The center frequency is set at 40 Hz.
Midrange:
Tube driven shelving centered at 400 Hz."
 
#46
thiessen3.14 said:
Big +1 to the p-bass with flats into a 659. That's just killing it for me into any power amp from my mackie monitors to the db728. Telefunken 12ax7's on board here. I, too was underwhelmed with the 359. Until the 659, I ran a fodera 2000 pedal pre straight into the 728 and that packed some serious punch.

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but on the 359/659 the eq controls are flat at 0 as they are boost only.
Click to expand...

The 659 is, IMO, the best sounding product Aguilar has made to date. I always described that as 'what the front end of the DB750 should have been. Similar fatness like the DB750, but more articulation, more punch, and for some reason, more EQ control. Wonderful product. Shame it isn't still around, but I guess the market for rack mounted bass preamps continues to decline from small to almost nill with the advent of all the powerful micro's out there.

The TH500 will get you pretty darn close IMO. Wonderful little amp for those looking for that fat, a bit dark Aguilar tone signature.
 
#47
Someone mentioned, all amps were not represented... I sold my AG500, was probably my least favorite aggie amp. The 659 to me was a little too wooly for me and oddly enough did not pair well with the 728. I started with the 359 and wanted more power and a similar tone. Tried the 659/728... too wooly. The 680/728 may be the ultimate combo if you can carry it.


The TH500 is a great clean amp especially when you put it in perspective based on size and output.

The DB359 is a great amp.. especially if you don't have to move it. It has a gorgeous tone at low volumes. It is not the loudest 200 watts I've ever heard. The biggest problem was with the older 359s in which a fuse would blow when the tubes got old. The problem was you had to take the amp apart to reach the fuse and if I remember correctly it was hardwired.

The DB750... if you like it is a great amp, but it is HEAVY. I never had an amp with so much power and so responsive at the same time. It's dark and definitely not as quick as some of the soild state amps, but does what it does very well.
 
#49
ChuckTrucks said:
I absolutely love my TH500 and DB112 cabs. Outstanding sounds out of that rig.
Click to expand...

It really is an amazingly good soundng combination. I'm not a huge fan of the format of the DB112's, with the 'low and deep profile', but they sound very good, and the TH500 and DB112 seem to be made for each other.

Wonderful tone platform for those who love the more vintage tones you hear on recordings of 60's J Basses and various P Basses... warm, round, and 'slotted where they should be in a mix' (versus overly extended lows or over zingy highs that you hear with some rigs).
 
#50
Pickebass said:
Someone mentioned, all amps were not represented... I sold my AG500, was probably my least favorite aggie amp. The 659 to me was a little too wooly for me and oddly enough did not pair well with the 728. I started with the 359 and wanted more power and a similar tone. Tried the 659/728... too wooly. The 680/728 may be the ultimate combo if you can carry it.


The TH500 is a great clean amp especially when you put it in perspective based on size and output.

The DB359 is a great amp.. especially if you don't have to move it. It has a gorgeous tone at low volumes. It is not the loudest 200 watts I've ever heard. The biggest problem was with the older 359s in which a fuse would blow when the tubes got old. The problem was you had to take the amp apart to reach the fuse and if I remember correctly it was hardwired.

The DB750... if you like it is a great amp, but it is HEAVY. I never had an amp with so much power and so responsive at the same time. It's dark and definitely not as quick as some of the soild state amps, but does what it does very well.
Click to expand...

Again, nice to have this thread back active!

We seem to hear things very much the same, +1 to all the above.

I love the 659, and can see that it would be a little 'much' combined with their big tube amp (that is the only piece of Aguilar gear I'm unfamiliar with...never have seen one of those). However, the 659 combined with a solid state power amp is, to my ear, a 'better DB750'. Just a bit 'tighter and brighter' but with that wooly warmth that the DB750 does so well.

I can see where the much brighter, cleaner, 680 and that big tube amp would be really something!

I also think the TH500 was quite an improvement over the AG500 (IMO there).
 
#51
Pickebass said:
...

The 659 to me was a little too wooly for me

...
Click to expand...

I auditioned one of these two different times when I bought my first rack rig (along with an Alembic F1X and a Demeter VTBP-201S).

The first time it sounded really great to me and the second time it sounded very wooly.

Same preamp/power amp/cab in same store -- go figure...
I'm thinking maybe it was sensitive to line voltage???

Anyway, folks say the a Telefunken in V1 does wonders to tighten the low end and banish the woolies.

I'd like to try another one some day, but there are so many good very light heads out now, it almost seems pointless.
 
#53
lo-freq said:
I'd like to try another one some day, but there are so many good very light heads out now, it almost seems pointless.
Click to expand...

I think this is why you see so few bass preamps on the market these days (at least the one or two space preamps that can drive a power amp). Most don't need more than the 400-600 watts of power that the micro's provide, and there is a voicing and power level for almost any tonal taste.

The SVT7Pro is a good example. They had some trouble with that one (not sure if all the issues are fixed), but the logic of it is great... basically the old SVT preamp, already connected to a very powerful power amp, and the whole thing is smaller than a PA power amp, but lighter than most, with no issues with gain matching inputs, outputs, etc.

I would think the market for stand-alone rack mounted bass preamps is tiny and getting smaller.
 
#55
lo-freq said:
For some, it is all about that elusive ideal tone inside your head.

Some of us are still trying to learn to be more practical.
Click to expand...

+1 I'm all about that. Luckily, I've never had to compromise tone for weight. However, I'm not on who needs to put a massive low end under two Marshall stacks, or whatever, so every situation is different.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back